I’m pretty sure Johnson & Johnson did not intend for their ad campaign to explain why people start to engage with sustainability, but I’m certainly using their tagline that way. “Having a Baby Changes Everything,” was by no means first coined by J&J’s ad team, but their great black and white television spots (remember the cute baby being washed in the sink?) made just about everyone stop and watch (parent or no, I suspect).  And, that tag phrase well represents the distinct line in the sand of life, where you think one way pre-first baby and about 180 degrees differently as soon as baby #1 arrives.  That’s why this particular life transition can be so crucial for sustainability engagement and behavior change in humans.

And, that’s why new research from EcoFocus Worldwide about EcoAware Dads is helpful.  Their recent study found:

Already, more than 1 in 2 Dads always or usually factor environmental considerations into their purchase decisions, and another 32% sometimes do so.  Almost 9 in 10 say it is important enough to change brands to make a more eco-friendly choice and more than 4 in 10 are prepared to pay more for environmentally friendly products that get it right.

But wait, there’s more.  3 out of 4 of the dads studied also agreed that : “with each step I take to make my home or lifestyle more eco-friendly, it gets easier to take the next step.”

What this all says to me, is that:

- What we see in moms with regard to their growing “green behavior” may be more a matter of parenthood than gender. So, when you see “green mom” research, replace “green parent” for “mom” in all that you read, and you may gain insight into a broader segment of your customer base.

- “Having a baby” is only the start of changing everything, but it can be a powerful launching off point. The opportunities for sustainable brands is to be there, just at that life transition point, to help newly super-environmentally conscious parents maintain their “green” living momentum and continue to take such responsible steps in child rearing and household management (and beyond!).

- Finally, segmenting market research into studies of moms, dads, aunts, chess players, bike riders, and so on, makes for much more sexy and exciting business news soundbytes.  However, as a seasoned and discerning marketing brain, your job is to think about how some findings may be very true across market segments – and then dig and combine to develop your own insights from there.

We can learn about sustainable consumer/citizen behavior by identifying and examining the same life stages, roles and influencers we’ve long known to affect buying decisions in general.  The subtleties and hidden gems of understanding come from taking into account what may be making consumers even casually consider “greening up” in the first place – and then serving that at its root.

Given that, “having a baby changes everything” may be a good phrase to just pin up on your bulletin board, right in front of your nose.

Photo credit: Paul

-

I can see it already.  When Dove first started releasing their various more noticeably women-focused, Campaign for Real Beauty ads – and they were effective/much talked about – brands all over the place went nuts trying to be similarly clever in jumping on the women’s thing.  Except, the women Dove was reaching so well were a very specific group of women, and no other brand, product or industry could simply slap a real women/not models campaign together and succeed.

Oh, but they tried.

“Marketing to men” may be the latest shiny object for marketers. But, I’m advising you to take a chill pill, step back – and perhaps revisit the “transparent marketing” guidelines in my book, Don’t Think Pink. Here are three:

1. Narrow your focus (and narrow it more and more and more – almost to pinpoint).  There’s no way you are ever marketing to all men everywhere.  Dove knows that, and did a ton of research.  That’s why the reality their Super Bowl ad depicted seems to resonate.  Guys are not being represented as uber-manly but more like the normal guys many of us know and love.  Life for adult men isn’t ALL about drinking beer and ogling hot chicks (who knew?).

2. Get to know and understand your customer community intimately. Dove found out that men connect with life in real ways – first you are young and goofy, then you get a job and find a great mate, then have kids and so on.  Life is rich and full.  The idea is to understand a day in the life of the man you are trying to reach, and also to understand a day that he may dream of (even if you don’t pose the question to him in quite that way).

3. Gather, utilize and acknowledge feedback. Without really talking to a few of the people they were trying to reach in developing the Dove Men+Care message, the skin care brand would never have gotten the tone and humor of this ad right –  just as was the case with their ground-breaking Campaign for Real Beauty women’s efforts.  And now, I’m guessing they are keeping track of how the ad campaign resonates and what is being said in blog comments and on Twitter to refine their future efforts.  Women are not the only ones who appreciate being heard, and given all the lame caveman vs. superwoman ad representations running now, guys are probably very receptive to brands countering that  theme (which has become cliched, in case you haven’t noticed).

Being guided and inspired by the customers you serve is the definition of transparent marketing.  Male consumers would likely say they don’t need a manly/blue filter on campaigns trying to get their attention.  Like women, they’d much rather be respected and connected with around values and ideas that are important to them.  So leave the grunting and burping for the beer ads – they do it so well.

*I’d give this ad campaign an  “A” for concept and execution.

Kimpton offers specially prepared dinners for its most frequent guests, including one recently in Manhattan for top-tier female travelers. The chain has also introduced weekend trips like the one in October for its most frequent travelers and their spouses, in Oregon’s wine country. The wine-tasting getaway came with meals made by Kimpton chefs, and a balloon ride over the vineyards.

Paul Seus, a management consultant from Chicago who attended the Oregon weekend with his wife, Amy, said Kimpton’s special treatment cemented his loyalty.

“Kimpton called me and asked me if I would like to do something special,” Mr. Seus said.
“I’ve traveled my whole career, and I used to stay, well, wherever,” he said. “Now I’ll only stay somewhere else if I can’t find one of their hotels.”

As Olson’s piece shows, a lot of other hotel chains are now serving the higher standards they learned about by doing female consumer research.  Two things worth noting:

1) Being guided and inspired by women does NOT have to mean the result is pink, girly and alienating (if not horrifying) for men.

2) Today’s men are starting to “get it,” in that they are more aware that women’s higher standards raise the bar for the service they (men) receive as well.  So, of course, men are noticing and learning to expect such treatment too.

What does this mean for your industry?

Look out “marketing to women” laggards, now you risk losing the guys too.

So, in the case of the recent DoubleX announcement, Matt Haber, the writer of the Portfolio piece cites a few other examples of women-focused sites that have been successful and why their editors think that is the case.  His piece also includes reference to an earlier American Prospect article by Ann Friedman, wherein – to me – lie the key points.  Those include:

If Slate saw a demand for more content about women, why didn’t it start publishing more articles for and by women on its main site? The decision to devote micro-sites to groups that aren’t white men — The Root for black readers, Double X for women readers — implies that Slate recognizes the need for more coverage that caters to women and people of color. But it doesn’t want that coverage mucking up its main product.

And, a little bit further along:

Even if men are interested and clicking, the problem with branding certain types of articles “for women” is that it still advances a false gender divide. We can all agree that men parent, too. Men and women care about fashion and follow Hollywood gossip. Yet when these articles are primarily housed under a logo that refers to female chromosomes, it perpetuates the false idea that women are interested in Forever 21 and Facebook but not torture hearings or health-care reform.

I could basically paste in the whole piece, but suffice it to say, it is worth a read and very comprehensive in laying out the evolution and demise of some well-known “women’s” sites.  Where was the reader in all this? Did the magazines/sites consider that in their development?  Some things to ponder:

1) Does the reader visit a site because she is a woman and so seeking specifically “womanly” information (diets, sex tips, fashion)?  Or, is she headed to your site instead as a human being interested in the topics of the day, politics or news?

2) Does the publication care more about developing great programs for advertisers rather than what the heck will bring a reader to the site in the first place (like – content)?

3) Is there no way this poor woman who is your “target” will ever see the site’s great tips or click on certain ads if she doesn’t see a “for women” sign of some sort directing her to that information?

***

Since (clearly) this topic of “women’s” magazines/sites can get me riled, and because it can serve as such a great marketing to women case study, I offer up two examples:

ESPN The Magazine (whose online version, apparently, recently got folded into Insider) – This publication could easily have created a “womens’” version, but instead the editors/publisher realized the core market was crazed sports fans – no gender about it.  That’s why you’ll see everyone from football players to female snowboarders on the cover, and reports on a wide variety of sports-related news within the pages.  ESPN The Magazine readers  like sports and sports writing, plain and simple.

Esquire Magazine – This magazine is labeled a men’s magazine and doesn’t overtly “market to women” at all.  In fact, plenty of women might find it a tad offensive.  Except, like the comment so many men have made about Playboy (“I read it for the articles”) – the editorial appeals to a certain group of women.  The magazine always includes extremely well-written feature articles (in my opinion) on all sorts of topics.  Yes, I’m a fan.  Check out the letters to the editor section, which usually includes at least one or two from women who seem to love the magazine. Esquire serves men and women alike who respond to that particular sense of humor, who are attracted to those sorts of in-depth articles and that appreciate writing talent.

For marketers, the point is to keep checking yourself and your efforts.  Do women happen to be avid users, readers, consumers of your product as well as men?  When women do buy your service or gizmo, is it because it speaks to their “womanly” ways or it speaks to their human interests or their style of humor, design interests, or functional needs…?

I suggest the default should be to market to women transparently (not overtly), as some of these magazine sites seem to be discovering.  Be guided and inspired by what women want and how they want it, but there’s usually no need to mention that that’s what you are doing.  If it boils down to the fact that you sell women’s razors and have designed one that specifically functions for the way women use them, have at it with the “women’s” stuff – but even still, don’t go overboard.

News and products that appeal to and resonate authentically with women ARE more necessary now than ever.  Just think twice before you “for women-ize.”

Tomorrow I begin a weeklong residency for a master’s program** in which I will be digging into something I’ve seen in that women’s market periphery for a while now: corporate social responsibility.  I intend to apply my years of experience with gender in marketing to something that should no longer be in the periphery for any corporation.

What are women known to do in the way they experience the world and their daily lives, as well as in the ways they buy?  They think holistically, or “it all matters.”  Why do consumers now demand corporate social responsibility from the brands they buy?  It all matters.

No longer can a brand say they are serving consumers well with one hand while they mistreat employees with the other.  Gone are the days when environmental practices can be greenwashed, because consumers are looking at brands with magnifying glasses.  And, go ahead and say goodbye to doing the right thing in pubic relations terms while hiding corrupt practices behind the curtain.  She sees you.

And, what “she” is doing with that information influences how she buys.  But, in the twenty-first century, her ways are also starting to rub off a bit more on how men buy.  So yes,  women continue to be the leading indicators of values-based buying behavior, but they are only the leaders – there’s a whole other group of consumers who are following that lead and we can’t neglect them!  Part of my work in this next two years will be to explore the nuances, the periphery, of gendered consumer behavior as it relates to brands and their corporate social responsibility.  I suspect that consumer values take priority over consumer gender differences in the new marketplace.  But, my research will look at how marketers in socially responsible businesses can integrate the greater subtleties of gendered buying behavior to serve shared consumer values with that much more relevance.

I firmly believe the brands that pay attention and work toward more socially responsible practices will win with women, and men, for the much longer term.  Keep reading my posts and articles along the way, and you’ll share in my learning process.

*If you’d like to see a copy of this newsletter, but prefer not to subscribe, email me and I’ll forward it to you.( andrea @ learnedonwomen dot com)

**Please note: my twitter presence and blog posts will be on the “light” side this next week due to this residency.

So… why has the pistachio industry used those situations or “celebrities” for a new advertising campaign?  Apparently in hopes of overcoming the bad pistachio blood from a salmonella scare, Bruce Horovitz writes in USA Today about how the industry’s marketers think this approach is a sure bet.

While I know a fair number of men likely eat pistachios by the handfuls (if my dad and brother are any indication), I’m less sure men are the core grocery store decision-maker on that purchase..  That’s what makes it all the more odd that the “sexy” campaign is so obviously more geared toward men than women.  What would the industry do if this effort ends up being, in fact, so very lame that women who’d otherwise choose pistachios might head to good old peanuts from now on?

I have blogged about this over the years.  The way traditional industries get this marketing to women thing wrong seems to be a fairly common occurrence, especially with their first attempts at really focusing in on that demographic.  Going the sexy route, often adds a whole other dimension of stupidity.  The marketing for the  wine brand, “Seduction” (in 2005) – which emphasized the “O” in their vineyard name, for one (go ahead, undress the bottle!) – would make for a great Sarah Haskins satire today!

Were there women involved in the pistachio industry’s development process who cleared the approach?  With transparent marketing, instead, the idea would have been to be guided and inspired by women – who,  I suspect, are the biggest pistachio buyers.  But, even if that sort of consumer interaction wasn’t a possibility (or within budget), I’d think that any of the women on the pistachio marketing team might have voiced a bit of concern (as in: “now, wait a minute…”).  Involving a few more women in this overall effort would likely have helped the team find a “sexy” way to sell pistachios that actually spoke to women.

So, I’m not saying that sex is always the wrong approach -but that, with women, there will have to be a lot more subtlety.  A dominatrix, Levi Johnston and “Greg Brady’s” adventures are just not in that category.

But, help is on its way – and actually has always been there, patiently waiting for us to notice it: the answer is in personal relationship books.  The longer I am in this field, the more I see these resources as a key to gender-focused marketing of any sort.  The caveat? Reading them may make some people a little uncomfortable, as they perhaps see a bit of their personal lives reflected.

But, here’s why it may be worth the discomfort. In the relationship books I’ve used in my research, and no matter when they were published, I have found some big “a-has” for helping clients and audiences to absorb marketing to women truths.  Consider the following:

You Just Don’t Understand:Women and Men in Conversation (orig. 1990) by Deborah Tannen.  Just one insight from this, now classic sociolingual work: that men tend to communicate around status/positioning and women tend to seek connection in their conversations.  If reading this book was the only guidance you had, you’d have learned something core to gender differences that truly apply in marketing.

How Can I Get Through To You: Closing the Intimacy Gap Between Men and Women (2002) by Terrence Real.  One insight that may seem unrelated to marketing to women, but… think again: “For men to deliberately cross over into the despised realm of the ‘feminine’ defies the structure of patriarchy itself.  When women cross the line into the ‘masculine’ domain, they reappropriate qualities the world holds in high regard.” Now THAT sheds new light on why the field of marketing to women has itself become a pink ghetto.

The New Male Female Relationship (orig. 1983) by Herb Goldberg. Just one insight that, again, has marketing to women implications: “A woman, therefore, can be just as macho as a man, and, by the same token, a man can have feminine defenses.  It is the effect of these masculine and feminine defenses that produces interpersonal problems and distortions in awareness, not a person’s gender.” To avoid “thinking pink,” marketers, too, should take gender out of it  – and consider the consumer’s masculine/feminine characteristics rather than their sex.

Finally, it was reading an Irish Times article about Himglish and Femalese: Why Women Don’t Get Why Men Don’t Get Them, the soon-to-publish book by UK author Jean Hannah Edelstein, that compelled me to write this post.  Her younger generation and non-American perspective offers yet another angle for marketers to consider as they communicate with today’s men and women. As the reviewer wrote, based on her reading of the book: Successful women use Himglish. They don’t beat around the bush. They say what needs to be done, end of story. Successful men, on the other hand, are adept at Femalese, even with each other. The marketing implications here? That it is worth learning the other’s language – both for communicating with colleagues and for working together to develop messaging with a particular gender focus (or deciding if a particular gender focus is even necessary).

Now, before you go rolling your eyes, here’s my final pitch:  In all cases, your marketing to women study must include the usual books, speakers, consultants, white papers and research.  Also, you will be ever-so much wiser to also include your own direct interaction/communication with your customers via some sort of panel or advisory board.  And, the third piece?  Stepping back from the task at hand a bit further to understand what may make the entire situation “tick.”

Human behavior and gendered roles may well be getting in the way of your team doing its best work in speaking to and serving women.  So, be brave – and start reading them at work!*  Relationship books include “secrets” that will give your brand the advantage in leveraging marketing gender intelligence.

___

*If that is just not going to happen at your office, let me know.  I can brief your team on all I’ve learned that can be applied to your fresh marketing perspective.

In “Pimp My Bed: The Male Sleep Lair,“Ray A. Smith of the Wall Street Journal describes the general trend this way:

The new macho mattresses they’re introducing have “muscle-recovery properties” and cooling technology, on the theory that men are more likely to feel too hot in bed. The bed frames feature built-in TVs, iPod docking stations, wine coolers, safes and other guy-friendly gadgetry.

One need only read the comments to that story to realize that the bed makers are marketing to a male fantasy – and even guys will call them on it.

Just reading the article (in which Smith valliantly tries to keep professional and not satirical) makes a person cringe.  So, why are these beds being made and marketed at all?   As Smith points out – there is not likely to be a big market for macho beds.

The ways these manufacturers and their marketing teams seem to have been thinking reminds me of the way a lot of brands market to women. So, what I notice:

1) They weren’t thinking or doing research, they were assuming.  Gender stereotypes reign.

2) They got so caught up in the accessorizing (cold champagne, at the ready!) that real relevance and core purpose/quality of product was likely diluted in the mind of the consumer.

3) They went so far to the end of the gender spectrum (super duper macho) that they may well have harmed their brand for the longer term.  Who would trust a company that so obviously is not in touch with its customer base?  Very odd.

***

Does all that seem so obvious to you?  It certainly should.

There may well be a red flag in even early on, internal product development language that brands should learn to heed.  If you are calling your gizmo the “for him” or “for her” version, go back with a fine tooth comb and do an audit. Make sure you aren’t making huge assumptions, going too far male or female in tone and shooting yourself in the foot for future reference.  In most cases, gender-focused marketing should be transparent.  So, find another way to surprise consumers with ever-desired TVs, safes and coolers.

Here’s an excerpt:

A number of truck commercials have begun to market their vehicles as being the epitome of what a true man needs. If it’s big, tough and can get the job done, then it’s for real men. These stereotypes aren’t exactly new to media, especially not in truck commercials.

If the commercials had stopped there, they’d still remain somewhere in the realm of our biased norm. But as with anything truly manly, Chevy decided they had to take it to the extreme.

Let’s take a look at Ford and their F-150. They had the foresight to include a small step that would help truck owners enter and exit the bed of the vehicle. A pretty obvious step forward if you ask me, seeing as many trucks have included small steps to enter their cabin for quite some time now.

While this could have been an outstanding opportunity for truck companies to come together and help make trucks more accessible, it turned out that such a wonderful future simply can’t exist.

Instead, Chevy decided to openly mock Ford Motors, calling the step a “man-step” and poking fun at any real man who would ever possess such a thing. Real men claim they don’t need a man-step, as though manhood becomes null and void the second you buy a truck with a step on its bed.

***

Consider Jason a particularly perceptive male voice of the younger generation of consumers.  Any twenty-first century marketing or advertising professional should take note of his thoughts (or hire him):

1)  Guys today don’t relate to the traditional view of “manhood,” and the ridiculous notion that F150s (or Chevy trucks) express it best.

2) Guys today are sick of media/culture representing them as idiots or via stereotypes that have nothing to do with their daily lives.

Sound familiar?  It looks like marketers have done it again.  They’ve ignored the long-time coming signs, taken the lazy way out, and lost touch with their core customer.  Now, that customer is peeved and starting to talk loudly about it. He is calling out lame media and ad campaign representations that have stereotyped his gender down to a macho caricature.

Isn’t that a lot like what women experienced for decades? They’ve come a long way in standing up for themselves, putting a stop to the madness and forcing media and advertisers to change their ways. And, now guys are taking their cue from women’s “assertive consumer” stance.  No more just shrugging shoulders and assuming nothing can be done.  More consumers today, male and female, understand they have the power to say no to such beyond recognition stereotyping.  They are spreading the bad word on brands and it is influencing their purchases (or lack thereof).

Gender stereotyping is absolutely an equal opportunity mistake.  The younger generations of consumers most marketers want to reach, no matter their gender, are even more likely to ignore brands that make it.  Mark Jason’s words.

The answer: it’s not an either/or question.  Rather, think of the interests/influences on today’s soup buyer and soup eater (who may, of course, even be the same person in this heavily unmarried world).  No matter who is in the buyer/eater role, soup consumers are all still looking for healthy and convenient nutrition, and possibly also looking for a bit more big picture corporate social responsibility.  Those things aren’t “genderfied,” are they?

Rather – as the Brandweek author (who is unattributed) writes:

In addition to reaching out to its core male consumer, Campbell is running Chunky soup print advertising for the first time in women’s magazines, such as Cosmopolitan and Woman’s Day, and featuring the product in ads that will air as part of female-oriented television and radio programming.

“Women not only make the majority of purchase and meal decisions for the household, but they actually consume about half of the Chunky soup that is brought into the home,” said senior brand manager Douglas Brand. “We took a fresh new approach with our media plan to speak to both men and women. People can expect to see Chunky ads during NFL games and in many other surprising places.”

Yes. It’s a whole new world, especially for a lot of traditionally male-oriented brands. But, the answer is not to start from scratch, or to look for the black and white solution.  Instead, get comfortable with the gray areas.  Try mapping out your unique layers of buyers and consumers to develop a hybrid of good, old-fashioned (relevant) marketing strategy.  The key to marketing to women – being guided and inspired by the customers you seek – should always be your bottom line, no gender about it.